#1 Edited by Trylks (829 posts) -

I just saw in youtube there is a ton of "big" mods for oblivion. 
 


Mods are also very important in many other games, Valve is specially famous for this, also maps users created for starcraft are an important part of the online experience, quake had some amazing material, etc.. I'm not much of a PC person, so there may be many better examples, but I guess you get the point. 
 
What I wonder is if this kind of mods will be offered as DLC at some point in consoles, opening the system to some extent. I mean, it would be easy to put it there, and maybe even disable some features as playing online with the mod enabled (the mode itself could be enabled and disabled, or activated and deactivated). The mods would be controlled, by the system company, getting some revenue, etc. Even mods could be tagged and accessible to children (or not) depending on parental settings.
 
I don't think this will ever happen, but I also think it is quite stupid. Giving the tools to people to do mods that would cost $1 or $2 (there is stuff in XBL for your avatar that is more expensive) would allow them to put their mods in consoles, show their skills for their CV, maybe having some fun (basically everything they get by doing mods for PC and some money), and would give the companies an additional source of revenue, they would get rid of this competitive disadvantage against PC and would be perceived as less evil and controlling, maybe more perverted considering the nature of many of these mods, but we already have Bayonetta, which is not a mod but a full game, so no big deal wrt that. 
  
Consoles provide more control, which is good specially for concerned parents, but some features and capabilities in PCs that could be controlled in consoles are just missing, and that could be improved, IMHO. 

Your opinions?
#2 Posted by ajamafalous (12147 posts) -

Those suspenders stay in place pretty well.

#3 Posted by kelbear (491 posts) -
@Trylks:  
 
Costs a lot of time and money to get updates through the certification process. Even if the necessary changes are made by the modder, the vetting would need to be done by the developer, and then again by the console company. That said, it's not impossible, the majority of the problems are due to overcoming habit, cost, and risk. If: 
1) A developer was big enough to convince a console company to work with them on a mod system 
2) There is a strong enough mod community that the community is willing to pay for their own console dev kits (or the developer would have to wait a while for PC mods to release, identify the good ones, and sponsor the dev kits to allow the modder to port to console for eventual release on consoles). 
3) The developer would need to believe in the quality of their mod community, and believe the PC modders are interested in releasing on consoles, enough to invest time and money in starting this system. Modders can't just half-ass their work because they're "mods". It would need to meet the same console quality assurance requirements that all DLC or downloadable games need to meet. 
 
Most likely, players would be asked to pay for these mods as DLC for the cost of jumping through all the hoops. 
#4 Posted by Dallas_Raines (2222 posts) -

The Japanese mod scene is...something.

#5 Posted by Jadeskye (4368 posts) -

@Trylks: They'll never open the system like that, opens it up to exploits and it'll lose them revenue. People will always pay for this kind of content, why allow the community to produce them?

#6 Posted by Willin (1285 posts) -

No wonder the general public stereotypically labels gaming culture as immature when shit like this happens. Ugh.

#7 Posted by SlowHands (347 posts) -

Mods are usually the best when they are iterated on rapidly.  Look at Garry's Mod, in the early days Garry was updating that every single day.  If a big mod was to come to consoles it would essentially have to be a complete game already, and at that point the guys making it might as well try to get an engine licence and sell their game.  Basically I don't think mods should come to consoles.

#8 Posted by Droop (1916 posts) -

I wonder how long after the Skyrim release we'll start seeing naked mods.

#9 Posted by Aishan (1023 posts) -
@Droop: I can guarantee that there will be some before the official release date.
#10 Posted by tourgen (4542 posts) -

Who is going to pay Bethesda for horse armor if they can get a good mod for $1-$2?

An open platform is pretty much required for moding. Never going to happen on a console.

#11 Posted by MaFoLu (1859 posts) -

@Droop said:

I wonder how long after the Skyrim release we'll start seeing naked mods.

People at Bethesda are probably making them right now, then posting them under different names at release...

#12 Posted by Arabes (345 posts) -

All the really good mods I've ever played were user created and therefore free on the PC. Companies would have to contact these people and do all sorts of liscencing deals etc etc. It'd never work. It only works when the company buys there idea off them or hires thme like the guys who did counter strike (I think that was a mod originally).

#13 Edited by PenguinDust (12626 posts) -
Unreal Tournament 3 tried to incorporate some mod-ability into its PS3 release.  In addition to new maps, there was a completely different 2D version of the game players could download and install.  I played around with the offerings a bit and enjoyed the experience, however because the game was never too popular, not much was done to utilize it.  Perhaps if something like this was applied to a Halo or COD it would have longer legs.  The problem then is how do you ensure that everyone playing has that map or add-on?  In the future, perhaps, the lobby will then ask you to download and install the mod and it will only take a few seconds.  I remember that was in original Xbox games although the download took some time.  Smooth, quick and effortless need to be the top priorities for the implementation of mods in online games.
 
As someone who has a ton of mods in my Oblivion and similar PC games, I can tell you one thing for certain.  They're not the easiest thing in the world to get to work correctly all the time.  Some mods, because they are created by the community aren't always operational.  Others can conflict with existing mods in your add-on folder and then there is the risk of corrupting your base game files.  They are risky ventures, but that's okay with me since they extend the life of a game by years.  Oblivion came out 5 years ago, and I am still into it because everyday something new arrives at The Elder Scrolls Nexus for it.  The uninformed might have problems if a mod broke their game and I'm nearly certain they would not want to go through the hoops it takes to get some of these things to work.  I might not mind installing a separate launcher, setting the load order and then running the game multiple times until I get that order correct to make my game work with the mods, but I doubt the average gamer will.  They'll want the mods without the trouble, and when you're dealing with revealing armor, anatomically correct monsters and killable children, the company can't get too involved with the content.  I don't think Microsoft or Sony (or Nintendo soon enough) wants their product associated with better bouncing boobs. 
 
The reason why I am drawn to the PC is because of mods and the untethered creativity that the community can offer.  Freedom has a cost, however and I believe it's probably too high for the console makers to allow.  If an exploit was hidden in a mod, then that could cause further trouble for those systems.  Actually, the creation of mods requires a more open system than the companies feel secure providing.  If I remember correctly, that's why Sony pulled the "other operating system" from the PS3.
#14 Posted by Trylks (829 posts) -
@kelbear: yeah, the quality requirements would be more strict when releasing DLC, but basically that's the intention of XBLA, the SDK and so on, to ease the process and to let as many developers as possible, including those not-so-professional-yet. Game 2.0 is the future (again), we see developers trying that with spore, with games that don't rely so much on AI and more on multiplayer (mindjack, brink, ...), and one of the best examples is probably the sims, which could not be possible in consoles yet, the point is, I think it should be. Besides, more strict requirements means developers can get some money with that, consider the mod developer gets a share, let's say 1/3rd, the game company gets the same, because they provide the tools, the tutorials and information and some quality assurance, the console company gets another third, they provide the infrastructure so that people can download it, pay for it, etc. 
 
Many people downloading many mods for $1 means many microtransactions (which is also something the industry wants to address), hence lots of money, people involved and interested, I don't really understand why this hasn't been done yet, Microsoft please contact me ;) The point is that, definitively, the entrance point is harder, developing for a console (even if it is for a game in a console) is harder than for the regular PC (each time they are more similar, though), but also more money could be made, and that means more people involved, with better qualification and skills, investing more time, more quality in the results, etc.
 
Maybe we can see the beginning of this with the stuff that is available for the avatars in XBL (I guess there are similar entrance points in PS3 and Wii), I'd have to check if there is content developed externally to microsoft, it may be there already, it should be IMHO, avatars have a greater user base (every user has one, I don't think any game gets any close to that) but I doubt users are any interested in configuring their avatars, I don't care at all about mine, I have to say, I don't have information about numbers of downloads, and money involved, though.
 
@jadeskye: as I said, the wouldn't lose revenue, but gain more. There is no problem wrt exploits either, Q&A would remain basically the same, from the console company and game company, just with content they didn't develop.  
 
@Lights_Up_The_Shaft: I think that DLC particularly would be rated M (for mature) :P 
 
@SlowHands: developers can choose to iterate, to produce evolving prototypes or whatever, this only changes the milestone when this is released to the wild and adds some additional quality controls from additional stakeholders. 
 
@tourgen: Bethesda should be getting some money from that mod and ensuring quality. Bethesda may lack some creativity and manpower that they would obtain from the community, they are not losing anything, but winning, it's a win-win situation. 
 
As I say, this is the future, IMHO, I don't know how long will it take for companies to realize or to realize the way to implement it, but I can help with that for a modest salary :P 
 
@Arabes: Yeah, lots of lawyer stuff, but, when there is money involved a way to make it work is always found, that is quite certain. 
 
@PenguinDust: mods in PCs are complicated, mods in consoles would be more simple, that's why users would be willing to pay for that difference, and that's why developers of the game would be obtaining a part of the share. 
 
wrt ensuring people have or not some content, that is already done with map packs, no difference. 
 
wrt companies that don't want to be associated with that type of contents, for me that's the main problem, but despite of that we have bayonetta, hot coffee (I think that was a cheap way of getting buzz around the brand "rockstar" and GTA), not to speak about what we can find in fighting games (rumble roses, dead or alive (Xtreme beach volleyball), ). 
 
Think what would happen if flesh pit was not obtained as an achievement after beating part of the game, but as DLC after paying, or if it was developed by "the community". No big deal, no big difference, just more money for  those that have the control, without losing any control, if they set up the process well (you can't get something from nothing)
 
I'm amused I found a way to milk consumers further before companies do. I think with the information they handle I could do that more and better, does someone know where to apply?
#15 Posted by MysteriousBob (6272 posts) -

I watched about five seconds of that video before closing it.
 
Keep that shit out of my console games.

#16 Posted by ZeForgotten (10397 posts) -

Finally something the 11 year olds will enjoy -.-.. woop-de-doo.

#17 Posted by amomjc (977 posts) -

@Lights_Up_The_Shaft said:

No wonder the general public stereotypically labels gaming culture as immature when shit like this happens. Ugh.

How does the gaming culture differ from that of watching beautiful cheerleaders jump up and down or ordering the latest swimsuit magazine? Has nothing to do with gamers, has to with men with too much time on their hands and an un-abused penis.

#18 Posted by Jadeskye (4368 posts) -

@Trylks: You've completely disregarded a key aspect, business. You can't just let people make stuff for your game then implement it and make people pay you for it. There licensing to deal with. You can't license everybody in their basement making oblivion mods.

#19 Edited by Trylks (829 posts) -
@MysteriousBob: The flesh pit costume is right there.  (After watching your games played list)
 
@jadeskye: I'm quite certain there are legal formulas that can be applied to those who develop mods of quality enough so to put them in DLC. Map packs are DLC, forge is there in Halo 3. As PenguinDust said, UT3 incorporated some of these ideas. As I say, mods, as DLC, in consoles, would be different to mods in PCs, to start with they would require to pay, and as PenguinDust pointed, they have to be simple (pretty much as DLC is now). But as you can see steps are being taken to let the community do more, towards gaming 2.0. What we are discussing here is a step that has a great potential (IMHO) towards the direction of gaming 2.0, that would be good and important, despite of the fact that the challenges to overcome are on par with the magnitude of the mentioned step, which may cause this to never come true.
#20 Posted by lockwoodx (2479 posts) -

Mods > DLC because you don't have to pay for them, and never should.

#21 Posted by iam3green (14390 posts) -

i agree, i think they should open up the consoles so people can mod their games. DLC, is kind of what mods are but they are crappy compared to what mods are made. maybe they could make a program for the PC to work with the game. it would go to the console, people can download the mods so they could play with people. i don't think we are going to see mods for console in a long time. they need to make pretty much a pc to work.

#22 Posted by thesavage (73 posts) -

@Droop said:

I wonder how long after the Skyrim release we'll start seeing naked mods.

I'm going to guess 7 days after the dev kit is released there will be a quality nsfw mod...Not that I have any experience with this sort of thing :\